I'll go ahead and add http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/5957 to the
list of DDN tickets that could use a resolution pre-1.0, IMO this
ticket should be pretty noncontroversial and is a clear bug, but
evidently not everyone agrees, so a ruling from the gods on high
should hopefully sort it out.
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 2:58 AM, Jeff Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/4996 - I don't know if it would be a
> good idea to make 'runserver' run as a daemon. Maybe it would be ok of there
> was a warning before forking.
I think that if somebody want to r
I had a few comments on some of these and was going to post them to
the tickets so they don't get lost, but my browsers acting up and
closing when I try to login, so I'm posting here.
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 7:58 PM, Jeff Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
>
> * http://code.djangoproject.
Hey Jeff --
Thanks for doing this! If you want to make it a regular thing, please feel free.
I've reviewed and marked the ones I feel qualified to call (#4996,
#6709, #6496, and #6932); I think Joseph should call #2259 and Russ
#6719.
Jacob
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
This is helpful, and it is the right way to go about it. The only way
to improve on this would be to include more than just your opinion,
and summarize any debate (if any) that has occurred on the ticket.
Sounds great!
I'll definitely include that in any future mai
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 7:58 AM, Jeff Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've picked a few tickets that have been marked as "Design Decision Needed".
> I am only interested in getting discussion going to help reduce the backlog
> of tickets that exist right now. I will voice my opinion on each
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 5:43 AM, Johannes Dollinger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'd like to propose the following changes to django.template. Some of
> them are partially or fully implemented in my patch[1] for #3544.
> Which of these have a chance to land in 1.0 (assumed I provide a
> patch, d
I've picked a few tickets that have been marked as "Design Decision
Needed". I am only interested in getting discussion going to help reduce
the backlog of tickets that exist right now. I will voice my opinion on
each ticket I present.
* http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/2259 - I think the
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 3:44 AM, Michael Glassford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> from what that says I'd guess you are using the InnoDB MySQL storage backend,
>
> Right you are. That limitation is a bit of a pain.
Yes, it is. Unfortunately, the best way to fix this is for MySQL to
either (1) imp
I'd like to propose the following changes to django.template. Some of
them are partially or fully implemented in my patch[1] for #3544.
Which of these have a chance to land in 1.0 (assumed I provide a
patch, docs and tests)?
1.) Allow recursive includes, #3544 [2]
2.) Add a template_cache to
Ramiro Morales wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 3:51 PM, Michael Glassford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'm trying to run the Django unit tests for the first time using
>> runtests.py and I'm getting a lot of errors like this:
[snip]
> This could be related to the "MySQL and Fixtures" note cont
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 3:51 PM, Michael Glassford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm trying to run the Django unit tests for the first time using
> runtests.py and I'm getting a lot of errors like this:
>
> [...]
> "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.5/lib/python2.5/site-packages/MyS
I'm trying to run the Django unit tests for the first time using
runtests.py and I'm getting a lot of errors like this:
> Problem installing fixture
'/develop/django/tests/regressiontests/views/fixtures/testdata.json':
Traceback (most recent call last):
> File
"/Library/Frameworks/Python
Excellent.
This could be added to google code? Is more easy run on trunk thta
doing the patching dance...
I test this shortly. I hope we could do this and prove that is doable
to all the *nix db guys ;)
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you
Please see
http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/3591
http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/DjangoSpecifications/NfAdmin/FlexibleAppHandling
http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/InstalledAppsRevision
Will
http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/DjangoSpecifications/NfAdmin/FlexibleAppHandling
do what you
Not really no.
With this solution I would override the entire admin index. Meaning
other applications I use for the same project will not have the luxury
of having their own way with the admin index page.
My understanding is that applications should plug into projects
without overriding each oth
On Jun 18, 7:08 am, jurian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I recently ran in to the a problem/snag when overriding the admin
> index page. The thing is that I would like to change the index
> displayed for a specific application, and not the entire admin index.
>
> So I though that it might be a good
Hi,
I have just posted a patch that improves the simple_tag by allowing it
to take the context and/or the inner block. See the patch in ticket
#1105 [1].
It is backward compatible, and while the patch is quite simple it
would make the creation of template tag even more super easy. For
example:
18 matches
Mail list logo
